The team of developers who've just been made redundant aren't likely to forget it. Or who it was that wished it on them.
Why would those developers ever want to work on another flight simulation or add-on again, when there's easier money to be made using up-to-date code for the big names in mainstream gaming?

Yes Bob, Wow!!!! - this closure could have a lasting impact on flight simulation in general, because a team of developers have just been made redundant out of the blue. Why would those developers ever want to work on another flight simulation or add-on again, and what are they likely to tell their fellow developers?
"The code is ancient history, it's a dwindling market, the customer base is skeptical because the remaining development and publishing companies are territorial and hostile. Better and safer to stick with mainstream companies and their games when you have a home and family to support."

When Microsoft leased the FSX licence to Dovetail Games in preference to a rival bid from a consortium of well-known flightsim developers and publishers, those developers and publishers closed ranks against Dovetail Games.
If you've ever wondered why AES Credits don't work in FSX:SE, and never will, now you know.
That's why those 'in the know' initially predicted the inevitable failure of FSW.
Those who jumped on the bandwagon added the lack of content, the business plan and anything else they could think of, but the root cause went deeper, wider, and much further back than that.
They say all's fair in love and war, but in business what goes around, comes around.

So I'll re-post Chris Trott's statement again, this time with some emphasis on the important points:
"2) DTG's business model on FSW was flawed yes, but much of what was widely "reported" was parroting of lies by one of the people mentioned in my original post. And they were (and are) lies. The misunderstanding of the original addon terms was quickly clarified by DTG very early on, but people latched onto that one person's statement and ignored the repeated attempts by DTG to stress that the original statement wasn't clear enough, what the plan was, and that it was just that - A PLAN. Nothing was ever set in stone.﻿"

No-one is blaming AVSIM Rob, and I didn't make any of these statements, Chris Trott did on Froogle's site.
Chris Trott maintains that some of DTG's competitors for the FSX licence are at fault, and by implication, those individuals within the "community" who believed them.

I agree Michael, new products and new developers are greeted with a lot of cynicism.
Chris Trott followed up his earlier comments with this, point 2) is particularly poignant:
"...I don't try to change history to fit my narrative and I don't try to sugar coat that history.
1) Flight! failed because of decisions outside of what the basis of the program was. There was marketing alluding to it being a "game" but under the hood it was the same excellent program that ACES had put out for years. The biggest problem was the change about 90 days before release to push back the release of DX11 (and thus 64-bit) requiring a scramble to make a 32-bit only DX10 version (that wasn't originally planned) that eliminated the ability to finish a lot of its planned features. The other was the decision at the same time to make it a Live! store only title, something that no one on the team was aware of until that point. As a person within the first external BETA test team, it was a great disappointment to everyone involved (from ACES on) when that was announced because they were a small team (30 people) who didn't have the resources to pivot that quickly and do a good job.
2) DTG's business model on FSW was flawed yes, but much of what was widely "reported" was parroting of lies by one of the people mentioned in my original post. And they were (and are) lies. The misunderstanding of the original addon terms was quickly clarified by DTG very early on, but people latched onto that one person's statement and ignored the repeated attempts by DTG to stress that the original statement wasn't clear enough, what the plan was, and that it was just that - A PLAN. Nothing was ever set in stone.﻿"

I agree Henry. I think 30% was probably too high a percentage for a new sim, and that DTG should have sold FSW themselves via the established flight sim publishers before putting it on Steam, as LR have done with X-Plane.

Recently quoted on the FSW Steam forum:
"Originally posted by Chris Trott:
Also, I have a major problem with another base premise of your editorial. Dovetail did have experience in flight simulation. I'm sorry that you have forgotten that Dovetail was made up of many of the original ACES team that worked on both Microsoft Train Simulator AND FSX. I'm sorry that you forgot that I reminded you of that months ago when you got it wrong the last time you went on a rant about their "lack of experience." Microsoft picked Dovetail because they had that background experience, not just the money. Dovetail had, among its programmers, the guys who literally wrote Simconnect from nothing. The experience was there.
I'm not going to go into depth like I was tempted to with my end of this, but I'll summarize my feelings as such -
1) Robert Randazzo is not a "pillar" or "leader" of our community. He doesn't deserve to be heard. He hated DTG because they outbid him and never gave them a chance. They approached him in good faith and he told them off. He continues to make money because of the things DTG did to FSX to make it more stable and allow him to make addons that previously would have crashed FSX immediately and he has no respect for them at all.
2) Aerosoft are their own worst enemies. Mathjis is one to talk since it was Aerosoft that was one of the worst offenders prior to the self-publishing revolution a decade ago with their "fees".
Flight1 and Aerosoft both took 50%+ of the sale price of an addon before the digital download revolution took hold and allowed developers to self-publish. Aerosoft is not a DEVELOPER first, they are a PUBLISHER first.
They claimed to have their own FS in development prior to the FSX license deal. What happened to it? Oh yeah, they abandoned it because they wanted to bid on FSX. Now it's gone, GSX v2 is gone (and talk about a money making scheme - GSX is one), and Aerosoft haven't released any of their promised addons on time since because they were relying on 3rd party developers with (wait for it) - NO EXPERIENCE prior in FS.
3) Carenado, ORBX, and A2A all licensed or published addons for FlightSimWorld (A2A licensed AccuFeel, ORBX licensed GlobalVector, Carenado released several FSW-specific addons). There were those in the business who did support FSW and tried to work with DTG. The problem was there was a lot of venom (mostly egged on by those who lost the FSX bid and put out misinformation and lies) that over-powered those trying to genuinely help. Those who were helping Dovetail stayed silent about it because they feared the kind of vile response that DTG was getting simply for trying.
4) Dovetail was in trouble from before Flight School. You failed to mention it (again) but Dovetail sold a substantial share in the business to a Venture Capital company a couple years ago. Why? Because Trainsim World, their new sim platform, was in trouble and hemorraging money. The conversion to UT2 wasn't going as well as hoped, they needed more staff, and the money wasn't there.
As such, they pulled most of the Flight School team off (and then cancelled it) and the team that remained to work on FSW was less than 10. It never got above 15 afterward. How do you expect 15 people to build a program on the level of XPlane or P3D when you have less than 1/3 the workforce?
Laminar had at least 50 working on XPlane at one point (if not 100), and who knows how many Lockheed has working on P3D. Would a less hostile environment from the community and publishers have encouraged them to put more people on it? I don't know. But it certainly didn't help give confidence that they would get rewarded if they did.
In the end, the reason FSW died is because of us, not Dovetail. We allowed a hostile environment to fester within this community and didn't support it. I see it in the comments here. Everyone "I called it...", "I knew it wasn't going to work...", etc. You're right - you created a self-fulfilling prophecy. You never gave them a chance. Don't blame Steven Hood. Blame yourself for not supporting the guys who were actually working and trying to do something for the community that we'd been asking for.﻿"

I stand corrected Christopher, thank you.
Meanwhile, 'money-grabbing' DTG have just announced this on the FSW Steam forum:
"We're going to be putting all of our mission pack DLC (Epic Approaches, The Last Frontier and the Spanish Job) free in the near future.
Regarding sales on other content, we're working with the developers who created that content to see what we can sort out."
Edit to add:
"the SDK site will remain available after the closure of FSW. As will the SDK and Pro Mission Editor."

Closer to the real value to whom? Microsoft were bound to accept the highest offer in what was, effectively, an auction. And DTG had their previous experience with FSX:SE and Flight School of course.
I doubt that the license's value has been destroyed by trying to monetize FSW, hasn't FSX been monetized already by Aerosoft? For the past decade or more they've been selling us FSX airports with the moving jetways disabled, forcing us to buy their AES Credits to get them back again. Imagine what they could do with a full flight sim instead of an individual airport!